D 



^^ Facts About the War 



Memoranda, synopses and 
significant items relating to 
the World War and the in- 
terest of America therein 



PREPARED ESPECIALLY FOR THE USE OF 
PATRIOTIC SPEAKERS AND WRITERS 




I S S U E D B Y 

Publicity Department, Minnesota Commission 
XHI^ of Public Safety, St. Paul, Minn. 





Book .M^" 



Facts About the War 

Memoranda, synopses and significant items 

relating to the World War and the 

interest of America therein 



Compiled or written by members of the 
Facuhy of the University of Minnesota 



"Methinks I see in my mind a noble and puissant nation, rousing 
herself like a strong man after sleep, and shaking her invincible 
locks." — Milton. 

■'I am for peace at any price, and today the price of peace is war." 
— President Hibben of Princeton Uniiersity. 



Hark! I hear the tramp of thousands, 

And of armed men the hum; 
Lo! a nation's hosts have gathered 
Round the quick alarming drum — 
Saying ''^Come, 
Freemen, Come! 
Ere your heritage be wasted^^ said the quick alarming drum. 



;fl^;\ 



- of D. 
""• 2J I9J9 



Fore -word 

This pamphlet is especially for the use of speakers and 
writers who desire in available, concrete form, material for 
patriotic addresses and articles. 

Most of the matter is very familiar to intelligent Ameri- 
cans, but they will probably find it convenient to discover 
sometimes the precise "chapter and verse." 

Of course we are primarily interested in the immediate 
reasons which brought America directly into the world-war, 
but behind the outrages by Germany upon America there 
clearly lurked the outrages upon Belgium and other lands, 
and the whole complex of foul circumstance which enabled 
the Pan-German plotters to menace civilization. Certain 
facts are therefore included which related originally to Euro- 
pean lands, although to things in which the United States 
has now a terribly vital interest. 

Many of the memoranda explain their own origin. The 
others have been prepared by trained men, who have given 
serious professional attention to the problems with which 
they deal. 

The best single preparation today for a patriotic speech 
is a careful re-reading of Mr. Wilson's great war message of 
April 2, 1917. After that, innumerable arguments will come 
trooping to prove that it is the duty of all Americans to 
do their manful part in winning this war for the defense of 
decency and democracy against red-handed ambition and 
autocracy. 

The University of Minnesota 
Minneapolis, Minnesota 
June, 1917. 



Contents 



America, and Her Grievances and Duties: 

Why we are fighting Germany — Secretary Lane. 

The Submarine Aggressions. 

German Intrigues in the United States. 

James M. Beck, on "America's Attitude Towards the 
War." 

A SociaHst on this War— Geo. R. Lunn. 

"America" (from the poem of Arlo Bates). 

The Typical American Attitude in 1914— Prof. A. C. 
McLaughlin. 

The Opinion of the Belgian Relief Commission about the 
justice of this war. 

The Difference between the EngHsh and the German 
Blockades. 

The American Ideals of Peace and the Policy of Ger- 
many. 

The Voice of America — Washington and Lincoln vs. 
Frederick the Great. 

The AlHance of Germany and the Pacifists— Theodore 
Roosevelt. 

Charles E. Hughes on "German Aggressions and 
America." 



An A-1 Patriotic Pledge. 

German-American loyalty — C. Kotzenabe. 

Conscription vs. the Volunteer System — Congressman 
Sydney Anderson. 

Conscription and Militarism. 

War Finance — The need for heavy taxation. 

The League to Enforce Peace. 

Our Inevitable Internationalism. 

Europe and Her Sorrows: 

The outbreak of the great European War. 

The Pan-German Dream. 

Bernhardi, the arch-prophet of Pan-Germanism. 

Belgian Neutrality and Its Violation. 

The Belgian Deportations. 

Norwegian Shipping and the German Submarine. 

Where the War has hit the hardest: Poland. 

Is the Case of Greece like that of Belgium? 

Germany, her genius and its reactions: 

How Germany is governed. 

Frederick the Great and the United States. 

German Relations with the United States before the War. 

Germany and the Hague Peace Conferences. 



why We Are Fighting Germany 



Plain words from Secretary Lane (Secretary of the In- 
terior and one of the ablest members of Mr. Wilson's Cabinet), 
June 5th, 1917, Registration Day. 

"Why are we in the war? Because we could not keep 
out. The invasion of Belgium, which opened the war, led to 
the invasion of the United States by slow, steady, logical steps. 
Our sympathies evolved into a conviction of self-interest. 
Our love of fair play ripened into alarm at our own peril. 

"We talked in the language and in the spirit of good faith 
and sincerity as honest men should talk, until we discovered 
our talk was construed as cowardice, and Mexico was called 
upon to cow us. We talked as men would talk who cared 
alone for peace and the advancement of their own material 
interests, until we discovered that we were thought to be a 
nation of mere money makers, devoid of all character — until 
indeed we were told that we could not walk the highways of 
the world without permission of a Prussian soldier, that our 
ships might not sail without wearing a striped uniform of 
humiliation, a narrow path of national subservience. 

"It is more precious that this America should live than 
that we Americans should live. The world of Christ — a 
neglected but not a rejected Christ — has come again face to 
face with the world of Mahomet, who willed to win by force. 

"We are fighting with Germany because she violated our 
confidence. Paid German spies filled our cities. Officials of 
her government, received as the guests of this nation, lived 
with us to bribe and terrorize, defying our law and the law of 
nations. 

"We are fighting with Germany because while we were 
yet her friends — the only great power that still held hands 
off-7-she sent the Zimmermann note, calling to her aid Mexico, 



6 FACTS ABOUT THE WAk 

our southern neighbor, and hoping to lure Japan, our western 
neighbor, into war against this nation of peace. 

"We are fighting Germany because in this war feudalism 
is making its last stand against oncoming democracy — We see 
it now. This is a war against the old spirit, an ancient, out- 
worn spirit. It is a war against feudalism — the right of the 
castle on the hill to rule the village below. It is war for 
democracy — the right of all to be their own masters. Let 
Germany be feudal if she will. But she must not force her 
system over a world that has outgrown it. 

"Feudalism, plus science, 13th century plus 20th, — this 
is the religion of the mistaken Germany that has linked itself 
with the Turk — that has, too, adopted the method of Mahom- 
et — 'the state has no conscience,' the state can do no wrong. 
With the spirit of the fanatic Germany belives this gospel and 
that it is her duty to spread it by force. 

"With poison gas that makes living a hell, — with sub- 
marines that sneak through the seas to slyly murder non- 
combatants, with dirigibles that bombard men and women 
while they sleep, with a perfected system of terrorization, Ger- 
man feudalism is making war upon mankind. 

"Let this old spirit of evil have its way and no man will 
live in America without paying toll to it, in manhood and in 
money. This spirit might demand Canada from a defeated, 
navyless England, and then dream of peace on the north would 
be at an end. We would live as France has lived for 40 years, 
in haunting terror. 

"America speaks for the world in fighting Germany. 
Mark on a map those countries which are Germany's allies, 
and you will mark but four, running from the Baltic through 
Austria and Bulgaria to Turkey. All the other nations, the 
whole globe around, are in arms against her or are unable 
to move. There is a deep meaning in this. 

"We fight with the world for an honest world in which 
nations keep their word, for a world in which nations do not 
live by swagger or by threat, for a world in which men think 
of the ways in which they can conquer tl^e common cruelties 



THE SUBMARINE AGGRESSIONS 7 

of nature instead of inventing more horrible cruelties to inflict 
upon the spirit and body of man, for a world in which the 
ambition of the philosophy of a few shall not make miserable 
all mankind, for a world in which the man is held more pre- 
cious than the machine, the system or the state." 

The Submarine Aggressions. 

The more important stages whereby American patience 
was exhausted: 

1. Dec. 24th, 1914 (Christmas Eve— fit day)— Admiral 
von Tirpitz throws out a newspaper suggestion on an "unlim- 
ited submarine policy," and directly asks — "What will Amer- 
ica say?" 

2. Feb. 4th, 1915. Germany declares a "war zone" 
around the British Isles, without protection to crew or ship 
passengers. 

3. Feb. 10th, 1915. America warns Germany that harm 
thus done to American citizens will involve "strict account- 
ability." 

4. Mar. 28th, 1915. "Falaba" sunk, one American per- 
ishes. 

5. May 1st, 1915. American steamer "Gulflight" tor- 
pedoed. 

6. May 1st, 1915. Germany embassy publishes warning 
in New York and other American papers against Americans 
sailing on "Lusitania," although United States government 
had decided such action proper and lawful. 

7. May 7th, 1915. "Lusitania" sunk; 114 Americans 
(many women and children) drowned. 

8. May 15th, 1915. Mr. Wilson's "First Note" of protest 
at submarine policy. 

9. May 28th, 1915. German rejoinder defending "Lusi- 
tania" sinking. 

10. June 9th, 1915. Mr. Wilson's "Second Note" of pro^ 
test; just subsequent to Mr. Bryan's resignation. 

11. July 8th, 1915. Germany promises Mr, Gerard at 
least to protect American ^nci neutral ships, 



8 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

12. July 21st, 1915. Mr. Wilson's "Third Note" of pro- ] 
test. '■ 

13. Aug. 19th, 1915. "Arabic" sunk unwarned; two 
Americans perish. 'i 

14. Sept. 1st, 1915. Ambassador Bernstorff gives solemn 1 
promise at Washington that "liners" will not be sunk without \ 
warning. 

15. Dec. 30th, 1915. "Persia" sunk unwarned in Medi- ^ 
terranean; an American consul going to his post of duty per- \ 
ishes. 

16. Jan. 7th, 1916. Germany promises still again that in " 
the Mediterranean, at least, no ships should be sunk un- .i 
warned. j 

17. Feb. 16th, 1916. Germany, seeking a money compro- J 
mise about the "Lusitania," says that she has now "limited 
her submarine warfare, because of her long standing friend- ; 
ship with the United States." j 

18. Mar. 24th, 1916. "Sussex" (British Channel passen- • 
ger steamer) torpedoed. Several Am^ericans injured. \ 

19. April 18th, 1916. (Following clear proof in the Sus- • 
sex 'affair of the breach of German promises) Mr. Wilson ^ 
threatens to break friendly relations unless outrages cease. I 

20. May 4th, 1916. Germany formally promises to re- : 
spect international law and not sink ships unwarned. ^ 
("Promise No. 5.") ' : 

21. Oct. 9th, 1916. A German submarine sinks five mer- ; 
chant vessels (one Dutch nevitral) off American coast. Heavy ■' 
loss of life inevitable if American destroyers had not rescued i 
passengers and crews. ^ 

22. Jan. 31st, 1917. Germ^any (having now built suffi- ; 
cient U-boats) tears up her "pieces of paper" to us and pro- i 
claims "unlimited submarine warfare" ("running amuck," ^ 
says Mr. Wilson). j 

23. Feb. 3rd, 1917. Mr. Wilson gives Von Bernstorff \ 
his passports. 

24. Feb. 4th to April 2nd, 1917. Seven American ships : 
sunk; at least 13 American citizens on them perish, as well ; 



GERMAN INTRIGUES IN THE UNITED STATES 9^ 

as several on non- American ships. 

25. April 2nd, 1917. Mr. Wilson asks for war. 

These are only part of the outrages, protests and prom-- 
ises: a record of patience on our part unparalleled in history. 

— W. S. D. 

German Intrigues in the United States. 

The authority in general is the report of the Committee 
on Foreign Affairs, as presented by Mr. Flood in his speech 
supporting the joint resolution to recognize a state of war 
between the United States and Germany, April 5th. (Con- 
gressional Record, pp. 192-3.) No case is presented here 
which is not mentioned there. "Times" means the New York 
Times. 

I. Coaling and Victualling of Sea-Raiders. 

Officials of the Hamburg-American line, including the 
managing director, Dr. Buenz, former Consul, and once Min- 
ister to Mexico, undertook, under orders issued by the Im- 
perial Government before the war, and under the direction 
of Captain Boy-Ed, naval attache of the German Embassy, to 
coal and provision German raiders at sea; and have been 
tried, convicted, and sentenced for it to the penitentiary. 
Some twelve or more vessels were involved. False manifests 
and clearance papers were sworn to, counsel admitted, and 
in the enterprise over $2,000,000 was spent at the outbreak of 
the war. (Boston Herald, Dec. 1, 1915; Times, Jan. 2, 1915, 
iv. p. 6; Nov. 24, p. 1.) 

Under the direction of Boy-Ed and the German consulate 
at San Francisco, the steamships Sacramento and Mazatlan 
carried supplies to German war vessels in the autumn of 
1914. Many indictments and convictions followed (see be- 
low). 

II. Conspiracies Against Foreign Governments. 
a. India. By order of the Foreign Office in Berlin the 
German Embassy furnished funds and issued orders, gen- 
erally through Wolf von Igel, Under Secretary, and the 



10 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

Consulate in New York, to the Indian Nationalist Party in 
the United States. Dr. Chakraberty, recently arrested, re- 
ceived, according to his own admission, some $60,000. Em- 
issaries were sent to stir up trouble in India itself, and arms 
and ammunition were shipped. (Times, Mar. 7, '17, p. 1, etc.) 
b. Canada. Werner Horn, a lieutenant in the German 
Reserve, was paid $700 to blow up the International bridge 
at Vanceboro, Maine. He succeeded in part and is now in 
jail. See facsimile of check, British White Paper, Von Papen 
Papers, 1916. 

Paul Konig, head of the secret service of the Hamburg- 
American Line, and associates of German birth, were ar- 
rested Dec. 18, 1915, for plotting the destruction of the Wel- 
land Canal. Here and in Canada, Konig has passed under 
thirteen aliases, English, German, and Irish. 

Captain von Papen, Von Igel, and a number of German 
reservists laid a second plot in 1915, and organized an expedi- 
tion to go into Canada, destroy the Canal and thus interfere 
with shipments out of the Great Lakes to the sea, and terror- 
ize Canadians in order to delay the sending of troops to Europe. 
(Times, March 31, 1916, p. 1.) 

Captain Hans Tauscher (Gadski's husband and ordnance 
expert for Krupp's), who on Von Papen's order furnished 
the party pistols and dynamite, declared afterwards in court 
that he "thought they were for mining." (Times, June 30, 
p. 9.) 

Von Papen paid Albert Kaltschmidt $1,000 to blow up 
a factory at Walkerville and the armory at Windsor. (Times, 
Jan. 22, 1916, p. 2; White Paper, p. 21.) 

Franz Bopp, Consul-general at San Francisco, Vice-Con- 
sul von Shack, Von Bricken, Attache, and others were con- 
victed, January, 1917, of conspiracy to send agents into Canada 
to blow up railway tunnels and bridges, and to wreck vessels 
sailing from Pacific Coast ports with war material for Russia 
and Japan. 

c. Mexico. Huerta's abortive attempt to start a revo- 
lution in Mexico, June, 1915, was financed by Franz von 



GERMAN INTRIGUES IN THE UNITED STATES 11 j 

'i 

Rintelen, Captain in the Imperial Navy and high official in ] 
the Deutsche Bank to the amount of $600,000. He had had \ 
intervention in mind when he came here, hoping that by ; 
engaging in war with Mexico we might be kept out of the \ 
European war. (Times, July 12, 1916, p. 10.) j 

III. Espionage. ; 

By wholesale passport frauds Konig and others, under i 
direction of Von Papen, Boy-Ed, and Privy Councillor Albert, , 
sent spies into Canada and to England and the Continent, • 
and reservists to Germany. The perpetrators of these frauds i 
committed perjury, of course, which they avow; and perjury j 
was involved in the testimony of Gustav Stahl, who, induced - 
by Konig, swore that the Lusitania was armed. A similar | 
indifference to one's plighted word appears in the violation of \ 
parole by the officers and crew of the interned liners, in j 
Acting Austrian Ambassador Zwiedinek's writing to Consul j 
Nuber to ask him to purchase false passports (Times, Dec. j 
11, 1915, p. 1; Dec. 12; Feb. 27, 1916, p. 3) and in the Ham-] 
burg- American Line's submitting false manifests. (Boston j 
Herald, Nov. 24, 1915.) i 

IV. Strikes and Explosions in the Country. 

The attempts to bring about strikes have failed, but i 
there have been many attempts. Labor's National Peace i 
Council, with which David Lamar and former Congressmen i 
Buchanan and Fowler were connected, drew its sustenance ; 
from the purse of Von Rintelen; and when that was with- \ 
drawn it expired. At conventions of labor leaders, farmers, ' 
and pacifists Rintelen's agents went about waving handfuls j 
of money and scattering it among the delegates. (Times, ; 
May 2, 1917, p. 5.) | 

Lamar and Martin were convicted because it was proved ;i 
that they knew where this money came from. The organiza- • 
tion tried to enlist the powerful aid of Samuel Gompers, on j 
his reiterated testimony (Aug. 18, 1915, p. 5) and that of I 
others (Meloy's evidence and telegrams, Times, May 10, 1917, ■ 
p. 24.) That it tried to bribe him he would neither admit I 



12 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

nor deny (Aug. 16, 1915, p- 3.) It instigated a strike among 
23,000 longshoremen, (Times, Gompers' statement, Sept. 14, 

1915, p. 3,) advocated an embargo on munitions and a gov- 
ernment monopoly in the manufacture of them, and the boy- 
cotting of banks which might subscribe to the Anglo-French 
loan. Without showing their hand, they seem in the matter of 
the monopoly to have won over Mr. Bryan, in the matter of 
the boycott to have secured the practical assistance of Mr. 
Henry Ford. Gompers testified. May 4, 1917, that they had 
also approached Senators and Representatives. 

Dr. Dumba, Austrian Ambassador, wrote a letter to his 
Home Office under date of Aug. 20, 1915, revealing that he 
and Consul-General von Nuber had made plans to create dis- 
turbances in the Bethlehem Steel Works and in munition fac- 
tories in the Middle West. Gompers (Times, Sept. 19, '15, p. 2) 
declared that he knew of Dumba's efforts before his letter was 
seized; and he added "that other agencies, none of which he 
would name, had signally failed, despite the expenditure of 
large sums of money." 

Explosions. It has been computed that up to Jan. 2, 

1916, twenty-three ships, in harbor or on an outward voyage, 
had been damaged or destroyed by bombs or infernal ma- 
chines. Lieutenant Robert Fay and his brother-in-law Scholz 
were convicted of conspiring to sink freighters. He confessed 
that he had been sent to this country by the German secret 
police to interfere with shipments of arms and munitions to 
the Allies. (Times, Aug. 30, 1916, p. 5.) 

Under direction of Von Papen and Von Igel, Dr. Scheele, 
Captain von Kleist, Captain Wolpert of the Atlas Steamship 
Company, and Captain Rode of the Hamburg- American Line 
manufactured incendiary bombs and placed them on vessels. 
The shells were made on board the Friedrich der Grosse. 

From the beginning of the war up to July 31, 1916, there 
were forty-three different explosions, attended by large loss 
of property and life, in munition and chemical factories in 
this country. (Times, July 31, 1916, p. 4, for list.) Though 
most of these were, in all probability, accidental, suspicion is. 



GERMAN INTRIGUES IN THE UNITED STATES 13 | 

in the circumstances, not without warrant. Those who sink , 
ships will not spare factories. 

On May 18, 1916, two weeks after the engagement to '. 
keep submarine warfare within certain limits, the German : 
Government commanded its subjects resident in the United ! 
States to obey the laws. That the order was obeyed, and j 
might well have been issued earlier, appears from the Times j 
index under the caption, "German and Austrian Conspira- ■ 
torsY' January-March, five columns; April-June, two col- j 
umns; July-September, three-fourths column; October-De- 1 
cember, six lines. , -i 

V. Covert Propaganda. I 

G. S. Viereck, Editor of The Fatherland, in the letter to ; 
Albert which he has acknowledged, took the precaution toj 
arrange for the monthly payment of $1,750 from the German j 
financial agent's hands through women intermediaries, whose] 
names he abbreviates. He admits that he does this to avoid j 
"any possible inquiry." (Times, Aug. 16, 1915.) So Von^ 
Bernstorff, in his letter of commendation to Braun, the' 
editor of Fair Play, does not hint at the check enclosed, for, 
$5,000 (Times, Aug. 22, 1915, p. 3.) The motive is that which: 
prompts Von Papen, in writing checks to reward his agents; 
for criminal operations, to indicate the real payee only on thej 
checkbook stub. Other startling charges of propaganda and; 
intrigue, disclosed by the New York World at the same time; 
with the indubitable Viereck and Albert letters, seem highlyj 
probable, since Von Bernstorff, whose honor was at stake,! 
"had nothing to say." (Times, August 17, p. 2.) | 

VI. In short, both the German and the Austrian em- 
bassies and many consulates have been guilty again and again; 
of improper conduct, not to say criminal. They have acted| 
as if all were fair in war, in a country not at war. The Aus-| 
trian ambassador and the German naval and military attached 
had to be given their passports. Captains Tauscher and von 
JRintelen, Privy Councillor Albert and Secretary von Igel, allj 
directly connected with the Government, as well as several 
consuls and vice-consuls, for instance those at San Francisco, 



14 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

Seattle, Richmond, and New York, have been guilty, and in 
some cases, have been convicted, of conspiracy to break the 
laws which safeguard peace, property, and life. The German 
ambassador himself cannot be cleared of complicity in the 
irregularities of his subordinates and associates; the large 
and timely payments to Von Papen indicated in the latter's 
private papers would show it, if nothing else. Besides, he 
covertly encouraged propaganda, and through the Libau 
agency interfered with our industrial liberty. — E. E. S. 

James M. Beck on "America's Attitude Toward the War.*' 

From the speech of Mr. James M. Beck, former Assistant 
Attorney General of the United States, delivered at St. Paul, 
Tune 2, 1917: 

"It is infinitely better for the United States to go to war, 
even should the Allies lose, than for us never to have gone 
into the war. 

"There would be a bar sinister across the escutcheon 
of America for all time if we had not entered the war. (And 
simply sat back and grown rich on the sorrows of the rest of 
the world.) 

"Too many in this country regard the United States as 
a great corporation from which they draw dividends, but 
which they do not owe any dut}^ 

"The leading nation in causing this war has exhibited 
a malignant treachery of which the Apache Indians would be 
ashamed. 

"if a man three years ago had mentioned the idea of a 
great passenger steamer carrying women and children being 
sunk, if he had mentioned the thousand other atrocities which 
this war has developed, he would have been voted a hopeless 
idiot. 

"The outraging of Belgium by the Germans stands un- 
equalled for ruthlessness and atrocities since the days of 
Babylon. Women, children and men were torn away with- 
out half the consideration accorded to blacks in our own 
nation in the worst days of slavery. 



A SOCIALIST ON TH.S WAR (gEO. R. LUNn) 15 ] 

i 

"The trained men and the munitions which France sent j 
to America in our Revolutionary war put our backwoodsmen j 
on some kind of an equal footing with the trained and j 
equipped soldiery of England. The indispensable aid of ] 
France caused the triumph of Yorktown and crowned the \ 
colonies with success. ^ 

"France helped us in our hour of need; now play a man's ^ 
part and repay the debt. ] 

"We have taken up our cross and are ascending towards \ 
Calvary to advance the progress of mankind to that event I 
toward which all creation moves." 
• • • • • • • • • • • ••! 

N. B. — Mr. Beck's books "The Evidence in the Case" and ] 
"The War and Humanity" (both pubHshed by G. P. Putnam \ 
& Co., New York) are perhaps the best available discussions'; 
for Americans of the respective subjects (1) "The Moral ^ 
Responsibility for the War" and (2) the reasons why Amer- i 
ica could not remain indifferent to the great issues as they 1 
developed since 1914. j 

A Socialist on This War. I 

Not all Socialists were opposed to having America ente^ I 
the war. George R. Lunn was the first Socialist mayor o^ ^ 
Schenectady, N. Y., and the first Socialist, incidentally ,• to be 1 
elected mayor of any city in the Empire state. He was i 
elected to Congress as an independent and here is what he { 
said when the issues of war or peace were being debated at ] 
Washington after the President's call to arms: ; 

"We have only two ways open to us. One is to accept - 
a war thrust upon us by repeated aggressions by a power '] 
which recognizes no law but its own imperial will. The other \ 
is to adopt a polic}^ of absolute submission. j 

"The latter course is to my mind unthinkable. We sim- '] 
ply cannot and must not submit. I hate war. I hate war as 1 
Washington hated war. I hate war as Lincoln hated war. ] 
I hate war as President Wilson hates war — but there is ; 
no other way. Madmen are destroying our civilization. ] 



16 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

Tyrants are threatening every principle and ideal of democ- 
racy. We must resist." 

The Duty and Opportunity of America. 

Arlo Bates' poem "America," (See Stedman's American 
Anthology, p. 533). 

"Here has the battle its last vantage ground; 
Here all is won, or here must all be lost, 
Here freedom's trumpets one last rally sound; 

Here to the breeze its blood-stained flag is tossed. 
America, last hope of man and truth, 

Thy name must through all the coming ages be 
The badge unspeakable of shame and ruth, 

Or glorious pledge that man through truth is free. 
This is thy destiny : — the choice is thine 

To lead all nations, and outshine them all; 
But if thou failest, deeper shame is thine, 

And none shall spare to mock thee in thy fall." 



The Typical American Attitude in 1914. 

(Professor A. C. McLaughlin of the University of Chicago, 
a distinguished historical writer, in "The History Teacher's 
Magazine," May, 1917): 

"When the war broke out in 1914 everyone in America 
was astonished and almost everyone was quite unable to 
understand the fundamental causes of it. Many of us were 
more than astonished; we were thoroughly out of patience and 
without immediate and deep sympathies for either side in the 
struggle. America had lived in isolation. Though our govern- 
ment had been to some extent drawn into the whirl of world 
policies, we had no deep laid scheme for exploitation of 
inferior races, no colonial ambitions, no determination to 
force our products upon other nations, and no fear of neigh- 
boring governments. We did not know that we were being 
jealously watched and that spies recorded our temper and our 
frailties. We did not see that we had anything to do with 
an European war. Of the ever vexed Balkans we knew little 



ENGLISH AND GERMAN BLOCKADES 17 

or nothing, though we had heard of the *'sick man of Europe" 
who seemed an unconscionable time in shuffling off this 
mortal coil. We had read of Hague conferences and peace 
societies and peace palaces, and believed that war was too 
absurd to be really possible between the nations of Western 
Europe." 



What the American Commission for Belgian Relief 

(whereof Mr. Hoover had been chairman) telegraphed Mr. 
Wilson after our declaration of war in April, 1917: 

"We wish to tell you that there is no word in your his- 
toric statement that does not find a response in all our hearts. 
Although we break with great regret our association with 
many German individuals, there is no hope for democracy 
unless the system which brought into the world this unfath- 
omable misery (in Belgium) can be stamped out once for all." 

Assuredly of all men living Mr. Hoover and his asso- 
ciates had had the best opportunity to come up close to Prus- 
sianism and its works, and to form a clear, accurate notion 
of it. 



The Difference Between the English and the German 
Blockades. 

The right of a neutral nation to carry on commerce in 
war-time is subject to two important limitations. (1) The 
warring nations al-e entitled to seize whatever contraband 
articles they can find upon the ocean if intended for their 
enemies, and (2) they can blockade the ports or coast of their 
enemies also. 

What Makes a Blockade? 

A blockade consists in the forcible closing of an enemy's 
ports to all neutral and belligerent commerce. By the declara- 
tion of Paris "a blocka'de to be binding must be effective," 
and the question of effectiveness is of course one of fact. It 
must be made steadily and exceedingly hazardous to enter or 



18 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

leave a blockaded port, not simply to stop or sink a ship 
now and then. American as well as British legal decisions 
say that the mere act of sailing for a properly blockaded port 
is a violation of blockade, and can result in the forfeiture 
of both ship and cargo. 

^'Continuous Voyages." 

The law of blockade was considerably changed during 
our Civil War. The chief alteration was about the "doctrine 
of continuous vo^^ages." The U. S. supreme court held in 
the case of the "Bermuda" that "a voyage from a neutral 
port to a belligerent port is one and the same voys^ge, whether 
the destination be ulterior or direct, or whether with or with- 
out the interposition of one or more intermediate ports or 
whether performed by one vessel or by several employed in 
the same transaction and in the accomplishment of the same 
purpose." 

In other words, the court looked beyond the nominal 
neutral destination to the real enemy destination, and de- 
clared ship and cargo forfeited when there was reasonable 
cause to say they were really headed for the Southern Con- 
federacy. European jurists bitterly criticized this principle 
at the time, but it was speedily accepted all over the civilized 
world. It was expressly applied during the Boer and Russo- 
Japanese wars. 

'' "Ultimate Consumption." 

\." In the present great' war the^lawof blockade has been 
st'ill further strained by the contending alliances. The Eng- 
lish have substituted a distant for an old-style "in-shore" 
blockade, but its effectiveness has been generally admitted. 
More important has been the extension of the doctrine of 
continuous voyages. A mere blockade of the German ports 
would have been easily evaded by carrying on regular Ger- 
man trade through the neighboring neutral states. To meet 
this situation the British set up the doctrine of "ultimate con- 
sumption." General neutral trade between Holland and 
Scandinavia and the outside world could go on, but when 



ENGLISH-AND GERMAN BLOCKADES 19 -j 

the imports and exports of these nations exceeded their nor- I 
mal requirements in times of peace, the whole course of their ] 
trade fell under suspicion, and the English reserved the right \ 
to treat such trade as of enemy origin, character or destina- j 
tion. ^ 

The American Issue with England \ 

The United States government most strongly protested \ 
against this novel extension of the principle of ultimate ' 
destination. To lessen the hardships involved for neutrals, ; 
the English have adopted the principle of "pre-emption" or] 
purchase of all non-contraband goods, foodstuffs, etc., which ■ 
they halted during transit to Holland or Scandinavia. The ^ 
rights of neutrals are accorded at least a partial recognition ] 
in this way. There is no sacrifice of lives, or reckless destruc- \ 
tion of property or denial of the most ordinary processes of \ 
law. i 

At very worst there is here only a question of property \ 
rights, about which jurists honestly differ, and where a com- \ 
petent international tribunal can adjust all differences on the ] 
basis of monetary compensation. i 

Analogy from "Interstate Commerce." 

Americans can see the issue perhaps more clearly by the j 
analogy of the decisions of the United States courts as to : 
what constitutes "interstate commerce." Many of our ship- ; 
pers have tried to get away from federal laws about this ; 
subject, by breaking up interstate shipments into their com- i 
ponent parts, so as to make it seem that the transactions ' 
were merely "intra-state" shipments. But the supreme court \ 
has clearly ruled that a shipment which is truly interstate in I 
character will be so regarded irrespective of bills of lading, i 
or the agencies nominally employed. Federal jurisdiction ; 
becomes effective from the moment of shipment, even though j 
the goods are still within the confines of the shipping state. ^ 
It is very much this way in international law, with goods \ 



20 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

which pretend to be bound for a neutral and are really bound 
f©r Si belligerent. 

The so-called "German Blockade." 

The German blockade is fundamentally different in nature 
and operation. It lacks all the requirements of a regular 
blockade. It is not maintained by a strong naval force, but 
by the illegal scattering of mines upon the high seas, and the 
sporadic depredations of submarines. By these stabs in the 
dark, much harm of course has been done to neutral and 
Allied shipping, but the whole policy has utterly failed to 
close the ports of England and France as a lawful "effective 
blockade" must. From the standpoint of international law, 
therefore, it is only a "paper blockade," and as such cannot be 
recognized by any neutral nation. 

Indefensible Use of Mines. 

The methods of this campaign are equally indefensible 
from the standpoint of law and of morality. The indiscrim- 
inate scattering of mines upon the high seas is an outrageous 
attack upon neutral rights and navigation. It flagrantly vio- 
lates the provision of the Hague convention that the employ- 
ment of automatic contact mines should be limited "as far as 
possible to give to peaceful navigation the security which it 
has a right to claim despite the existence of war." Mines 
are perhaps the greatest menace to neutral trade. From their 
very nature they are no respecter of persons. They destroy 
neutrals and belligerents alike and in this very feature may 
be found the occasion for their employment. 

The Submarine Piracies. 

The submarine campaign is hardly less inhuman. The 
submarine is a perfectly legitimate instrument of war. It is 
entitled to all the rights and subject to all the obligations of 
other naval vessels. But under the German admiralty is has 
been transformed into a veritable pirate. It has disregarded 
all the rules of law and humanity. It has spared neither 
hves nor property. According to the recognized principles 



ENGLISH AND GERMAN BLOCKADES 21 

of international law, the captors of a belligerent ship must 
make full provision for the safety of the crew and passengers 
of the captured vessel and for the preservation of the ship's 
papers. A neutral vessel is entitled to still greater considera- 
tion from the belligerents. It cannot be destroyed save under 
exceptional circumstances and as a general rule should be 
brought before a prize court for adjudication. But the Ger- 
man submarine is a law unto itself. It makes no captures. 
Its purpose is that of destruction only. It seeks to command 
the seas by the terror of its operations. It is in a word, an 
international outlaw, defying alike the laws of God and of 
man. 

To make the blockade more effective, if possible, Ger- 
many has proclaimed a closed sea around the British Isles, in 
the B&-y of Biscay aind in the Mediterranean. She has sought 
to write her favorite word "verboten" upon the waters of the 
Atlantic. She has attempted to set up a new tyranny over 
the seas, and in so doing has demonstrated the falsity of her 
pretention that she is championing "the freedom of the seas." 

The Difference Between Law and Anarchy. 

The difference between the English and the German 
blockades is therefore a difference between capture and de- 
struction, between the orderly procedure of a prize court and 
the arbitrary commands of a naval despot. But it is more 
than that. It is the difference between law and anarchy, 
between civilization and barbarism. It is the difference be- 
tween peace and war. A self-respecting nation can and should 
be prepared to submit its legal dispute with other nations to 
arbitration. The dispute between America and England is 
just this kind of a dispute, and there is a treaty obligation to 
submit it to the Hague. But no nation can surrender its pri- 
mary right to protect its own citizens. It cannot condone or 
arbitrate the crime of murder. It cannot surrender its own 
independence or sacrifice the principle of the legal equality 
of nations. The issue is a life and death issue, — American 
independence or the Teutonic yoke. — C. D. A. 



22 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

The American Ideas of Peace and the Policy of Germany. 

In his inaugural address, March 5, 1917, Mr. Wilson laid 
down -with great clearness the ideals of brotherhood, fair deal- 
ing and international justice which the vast majority of Amer- 
icans are certain must be observed, provided this world is to 
be a safe and happy place in the future. No one can contrast 
these principles with the things Germany has done, or boasted 
that she would like to do, and not see that her absolute defeat 
is an indispensable preliminary to saving the next generation 
from the fiery ordeal -of the present. 

Mr. Wilson declared as just American principles: 

"That all nations are equally interested in the peace of 
the world and in the political stabiHty of free peoples and 
equally responsible for their maintenance." 

Germany through her leaders has boasted of the inevit- 
ability and "blessedness" of war, and the duty of ruining sister 
nations for her own selfish aggrandizement. 

"That the essential principle of peace is the actual equality 
of nations in all matters of right and privilege." 

How much "right and privilege" had innocent but weak 
Belgium? 

"That peace cannot securely or justly rest upon an armed 
balance of power." 

If the war ends without Germany being thoroughly 
beaten, no nation that does not arm itself to the teeth can be 
for an instant safe. 

"That governments derive all their just powers from the 
consent of the governed, and no other powers should be sup- 
ported by the family of nations." 

Germany is the most autocratically governed country of 
all those which pretend to be civilized, and her ruling class 
is now trying to impose its will by the sword upon the rest of 
the world. 

"That seas should be equally free and safe for the use 
of all peoples." 

Germany has sunk friendly American and other neutral 
ships, far out at sea, away from the lands with which she was 



THE VOICE OF AMERICA 23 

at war: and otherwise defied every plain rule of international 
maritime warfare. 

"That national armaments should be limited to the neces- 
sities of national order and domestic safety." 

Germany has been the chief opponent of any form of dis- 
armament at the Hague and other peace conferences ; she was 
responsible above any other nation for the terrible rivalry with 
armaments before 1914, and she is today forcing peaceful 
America to try to become, temporarily at least, a military 
nation. 

"That each nation (has) the duty of seeing to it that (all 
attempts by) its own citizens meant to encourage or assist 
revolution in other states should be sternly suppressed." 

What has Germany tried to do in this country and in 
Mexico? 

Any examination of the situation demonstrates that there 
can be no fair hope for the peace of the world unless Germany 
is finally and decisively defeated. — W. S. D. 

The Voice of America. 
The Foundations of American Foreign Policy. 

Washington (First Inaugural Address, 1789.) 
"The foundations of our national policy will be laid in the 
pure and immutable principles of private morality. There 
exists an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness, 
between duty and advantage, between an honest and magnan- 
imous policy and the solid rewards of public prosperity. 

The propitious smile of heaven can never be expected 
upon a (national) union which disregards the eternal rules of 
order and right, which heaven itself has ordained." 



Abraham Lincoln (Second Inaugural Address, 1865.) 

"With malice towards none, with charity for all, with 
firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us 
finish the work we are in — to bind up another's wounds, to 



24 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow 
and orphans: to do all which may achieve and cherish a just 
and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations." 



Contrast with these the dicta of Bernhardi, (p. 41) or this 
opinion of Frederick the Great (founder of Prussian power 
and oracle to all his successors) : 

"The question of right is an affair of ministers. It is time 
to consider it in secret, for the orders to my troops (to attack) 
have been given." And again, "take what you can — you are 
never wrong unless you are obliged to give back." 

This war will settle which spirit is to rule the world — 
that of Washington and Lincoln, or of Frederick and Bern- 
hardi?— W. S. D. 

The Alliance of Germany and the Pacifists. 

Theodore Roosevelt in his speech at New York, March 
20, 1917, just before America entered the war: 

*T want to point out this curious fact: for the last two and 
one-half years we have seen a revival of the world-old alliance 
of Blifil and Black George; for we have seen the American 
pacifist meaching around to try to curry favor with the Ger- 
man militarist. The American pacifist, the professional paci- 
fist, has been the tool and subordinate ally of the pro-German 
of this countr}^ 

"And I have been struck by the perfectly matter-of-fact 
way in which it has been brought out that some of the pro- 
fessional pacifist meetings in Washington have been paid for 
out of the German corruption fund. Of course, that is not 
true of all the pacifist mxCetings; some of them were due to 
sheer unpaid folly. But the most efficient pacifist work has 
been pro-German work engineered by the pro-Germans." 



GERMAN AGGRESSIONS AND AMERICA 25 

Charles E. Hughes 

on 

"Germany and America." 

Disloyal critics have said that Mr. Wilson did not speak 
for the whole American people when he arraigned Germany. 
They should listen then to Judge Hughes, who was almost 
chosen in Mr. Wilson's place. Nothing which the President 
asserted was any stronger than what this authorized and ac- 
cepted leader of the Republican party proclaimed just before 
the declaration of war. (New York speech: March 20, 1917.) 

"Germany is making war upon the United States: making 
war with a ruthless barbarity. It is not a question of legal- 
istic quibbling. There is now a state of war, and the people 
of the United States should recognize the fact. Our citizens 
have been murdered. Our ships are being sunk. The prin- 
ciple involved in those attacks threatens the integrity of our 
country. I regard these attacks, and the methods of their con- 
duct as an onslaught on liberty and on civilization itself. It is 
time that the American people understood it." . . . "And 
so we go out tonight, ready to serve — to do and to die for 
our cotintry." 

An A-1 Patriotic Pledge. 

"Resolved, That until this war is prosecuted to a success- 
ful end, until the enemy is compelled to sue for peace, until 
the seas are everywhere made safe and free to American men, 
women and children; until there shall exist on earth no gov- 
ernment that does not derive its power from the governed — - 
we pledge our lives, our efforts, our talents and our honor, to 
uphold the hands of the President of the United States." 

This pledge originated with the Tammany Society of New 
York, but whatever its origin, for once the platform makers of 
Tammany struck the right nail on the head. President Wil- 
son congratulated the society for "its admirable patriotic reso- 
lutions," and many newspapers, otherwise critical, commended 
this expression as "a model pledge of militant loyalty to the 
government." 



26 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

German-American Loyalty. 

C. Kotzenabe in Paterson's MagSLzine. 
Reprinted in The MINNEAPOLIS JOURNAL, May 31, 1917. 

My emotions tell me one thing at this awful time, but my 
reason tells me another. As a German by birth it is a horrible 
calamity that I may have to fight Germans. That is natural, 
is it not, son? But as an American by preference I can see no 
other course open. 

For 25 years Germany has shown dislike for the United 
States— ;the Samoan affair, the Hongkong contretemps, the 
Manila Bay incident, the unguarded words of the Kaiser him- 
self, and lastly, the Haitian controversy in 1914. And it has 
not been from mere commercial or diplomatic friction. It is 
because their ideals of government are absolutely opposite. 
One or the other must go down. It is for us to say now which 
it shall be. 

Because of my birth and feelings beyond my control I 
have no particular love for the French and less for the British. 
But by a strange irony of fate I see those nations giving their 
blood for principles which I hold dear, against the wrong prin- 
ciples of people I individually love. It is a very unhappy para- 
dox, but one I cannot escape. I do not want to see the Allies 
triumph over the land of my birth. But I very much want to 
see the triumph of the ideas they fight for. 

It sickens my soul to think of this nation going forth to 
help destroy people many of whom are bound to me by ties 
of blood and friendship. But is must be so. It is like a 
dreadful surgical operation. The militaristic, undemocratic 
demon which rules Germany must be cast out. It is for us to 
do it — now. I have tried to tell myself that it is not our affair, 
that we should have contented ourselves with measures of de- 
fense and armed neutrality. But I know that is not so. The 
mailed fist has been shaken under our nose before. If Prus- 
sianism triumphs in this war, the fist^will continue to shake. 
We shall be in real peril and those ideas for which so much of 
the world's best blood has been spilled through the centuries 
will be in danger of extinction. It seems to me common sense 



CONSCRIPTION VS. VOLUNTEER SYSTEM 27 

that we begin our defense by immediate attack when the 
demon is occupied and when we can command assistance. 

There is much talk of what people like me will do, and 
fear of the hyphen. No such thing exists. The German- 
American is as stanch as the American of adoption of any 
other land and perhaps more so. Let us make war upon Ger- 
many, not from revenge, not to uphold her splitting quibbles 
of international law. But let us make war with out whole 
heart and with all our strength because Germany worships one 
God and we another, and because the lion and the lamb cannot 
lie down together. One or the other must perish. 

Let us make war upon the Germany of the Junkerthum, 
the Germany of fright fulness, the Germany of arrogance and 
selfishness. And let us not make peace until the imperial 
German government is the soverign German people. 

Conscription vs. the Volunteer System. 

On April 24, 1917, Representative Sydney Anderson of 
Minnesota, First District, delivered in Congress a speech on 
the Selective Draft, of which the gist is as follows: 

The volunteer system has failed. "Almost without ex- 
ception, every war in which we have been engaged has been 
unnecessarily prolonged by the failure to adopt sound and 
vigorous policies at the outset, by the volunteer system, by 
short enlistments, by yielding to mild preachments." This has 
meant unnecessary waste of life and treasure. In our greatest 
war, the Civil War, the volunteer s^^stem broke down entirely, 
but the resort to the draft came long after volunteering had 
practically ceased, and thus the draft cast the stigma of "slack- 
ers" upon the men drafted. 

The volunteer system is wrong in principle. It is wrong 
because: (a) "It takes those who ought not to go." (b) "It 
exempts those who ought, to go." "It is the spirit of 'Let 
George do it.' Thus the men with the highest sense of public 
duty and of greatest usefulness and spirit are sacrificed lat the 
very first. Men who would be more useful in industry go 
to the front, while those whom industry could spare stay at 



28 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

home." (c) It shifts the burden of decision for a matter 
which concerns all, to the individual, and to his mother and his 
family. Since war is a matter which concerns the whole peo- 
ple, the government of the whole people should choose the 
men to fight it. How absurd it would be to levy taxes on a 
volunteer basis! What anarchy would result! What injus- 
tice to the honest and the public spirited! 

The task before us is great. We have entered upon a 
great war. *'We do not know whether this war will last three 
months or three years, whether we will need 500,000 men or 
5,000,000. Wisdom requires that we base our calculations 
upon the longer period and the greatest number." We are 
at war. "War is a hard-fisted, hard-headed, hard-hitting busi- 
ness. In it to yield to soft measures is to yield success." We 
must use our strongest weapon at once. That weapon is com- 
pulsory military service by government selection. Volun- 
teering has failed. 

The selective draft is democratic and American. ''Uni- 
versal obligatory service has always been recognized as an 
essential principle of our Government." "The right to enlist 
or not to enlist, to serve or not to serve, is not a privilege 
granted to the individual, but an obligation imposed by the 
Government." The draft is not undemocratic. When it com- 
pels a man to go to war it does no more than any other law 
behind which there is com.pulsive force. We do not let men 
obey laws or not obey, as they choose. Neither do we let 
them pay taxes or not at their own will. We enforce the duty 
in every case. To do otherwise would not be democracy but 
anarchy. 

It casts no stigftia upon any man. If used at once, at the 
beginning of war, without first a trial of volunteering, then no 
man is a slacker. And he who is called to serve his govern- 
ment, to act in her defense, is honored. 

It is just. It puts the burden of choice where it belongs. 
The most ardent patriot can wait, with the sure feeling that 
the government will take him if it needs him. The mother has 
not the burden upon her of deciding for the son. The gov- 



CONSCRIPTION AND MILITARISM 29 ^ 

ernment makes the decision, taking those men who can best ; 

be spared from other work. ' 

It is efficient. It makes possible the quick assembling and | 

training of a large army. It avoids the delays and losses suf- \ 

fered when the volunteer system is relied on. "Every man ; 

cannot serve his country on the field of battle." Some must i 

be at home to till the farms and to run the mines and fac- [ 

tories. The selective draft avoids the crippling of vital indus- : 

tries. The government is in the best position to decide who | 

can be spared and who can not. It is not fair, nor is it effi- j 

Oient, to let the individual decide for himself what he can ^ 

best do. ] 

It is our strongest weapon. i 

Excerpt: "The so-called volunteer system is always ad- i 

vocated in the name and for the sake of the volunteer, but it ; 

is not the man who is willing to serve, but the man who is \ 

unwilling to serve who profits by its adoption." ^ 

Excerpt: "Even those who advocate it (the voluntary | 

system) do not dare rest the safety of the nation upon it ■ 

alone." They presented a bill in Congress which provided a | 

volunteer system to begin with, but threatened the draft if j 

not enough volunteered. ] 

— Congressional Record, 65th Congress, i 

1st Session, pp. 1038-1039. ! 

Conscription and Militarism. } 

There is a constant tendency to confuse conscription, the| 
calling of the whole man-power of the nation for defense, and] 
militarism, which means the dominance of purely military ^ 
ideals and of the military class. ; 

The latter is entirely foreign to us. We never had, we^ 
never shall have, the dominance. In the Civil War our mili-'; 
tarv powei^rose to'greater heights thanfever before. Did we! 



30 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

become militarized? Far from it. The soldiers went right 
back on the farms and into the factories. The civil authori- 
ties, controlled by popular authority, ruled once more. In- 
deed, it is a principle of law with us, implied in the Federal 
Constitution, and stated in forty-six of forty-eight state con- 
stitutions, that the military is subordinate to the civil power. 
In the Minnesota Constitution we read (Art. 1, Sec. 14) : "The 
military shall be subordinate to the civil power, and no stand- 
ing army shall be kept up in this state in time of peace." 

Not so in Germany. There the military rules. In the 
so-called Zabern Incident in 1913-14, the whole civihan popu- 
lation of Germany protested against the military arrogance 
which resulted in the sabering by a young Prussian officer of 
a crippled shoemaker in Alsace. The attack was entirely un- 
provoked, save that the civilian population had been casting 
jibes at the pomposity of the young soldier. The Reichstag 
by a tremendous majority voted its want of confidence in the 
government, especially in the Chancellor von Bethmann Holl- 
weg. But what happened? A military court suspended the 
sentence against the young officer, absolved all other officers 
concerned, and practically complimented all the military in 
the garrison for their stern measures. And the Chancellor, 
in public address, asserted that the army was the whole 
strength of the Empire, and that the military authority must 
be maintained even as against the civil. 

That is militarism. When civil rights give way to mili- 
tary power in time of profound peace, when civil courts have 
tio power over military officers, when the latter are really a 
iaw unto themselves — that is militarism. Germany has it. 
We have it not. — W. A. 

War Finance. 

Contrary to general opinion, it is not absolutely necessary 
[or a government or a people to have any money in order to 
prosecute a war; the prime essentials are men, munitions, food, 
clothing, el cetera. Proper understanding of war finances in- 
volves the ability to see through the medium of exchange — 



WAR FINANCE 31 

money — to the real things with which a war is prosecuted. 

War is an extra undertaking, and hence involves the diver- 
sion of labor and capital from peace to war pursuits. Men 
must be released for the firing line and for the production of 
munitions, additional food, and clothing for the army. Taxa- 
tion of commodities, whether in the form of tariffs or excise 
taxes, raises prices and this cuts down consumption and con- 
sequent production. Taxation of incomes cuts down con- 
sumption also, but in another manner; that is, by reducing the 
funds with which individuals may make purchases. Both 
forms of taxation thus release labor and capital from produc- 
ing unnecessaries and, with its added purchasing power, the 
government can use them for its military purposes. Com- 
modity taxation is not very productive of revenue except as it 
is placed upon articles of very general consumption, such as 
sugar, coffee, flour, liquor, tobacco, etc.; hence revenue thus 
taised taxes people in proportion to their consumption, rather 
than in proportion to their ability to pay and falls heavily 
upon the poor. 

If taxes upon large incomes are very heavy, the result 
may be that repairs and extension of plants will not be under- 
taken, but if these plants produce things that are greatly 
needed, the prices of such articles will rise so as to make 
necessary repairs and extensions desirable. 

But the income tax is not easy to administer in all cases. 
Because farmers and others do not keep adequate and accu- 
rate^ accounts of income, especially of income not in the form 
of money, and also because the cost of collecting taxes upon 
small incomes is excessive as compared with the yield, it may 
be best to adopt taxes upon some articles of general consump- 
tion in order to reach such incomes. Similarly, for admin- 
istrative reasons, it would probably be well to levy special 
taxes upon extraordinary war profits of corporations, though 
it might be more equitable to tax them in the hands of the 
receivers under a personal income tax. 

Raising money by bonds instead of by taxation, has the 
merit of accommodating those whose wealth and income are 



32 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

not in a liquid form, or which are badly needed temporarily for 
other purposes. Others who are better situated in this respect 
may advance promptly more than their share and be repaid by 
the former when more convenient. But bond issues have at 
least two serious disadvantages as compared with taxes; they 
result in inflating prices and thus in throwing unduly heavy 
burdens upon those who receive fixed incomes, as for example, 
recipients of wages, salaries, and interest, and* in the second 
place, they usually result in a relatively lighter burden upon 
the well-to-do and an unduly heavy burden upon the poor, for 
they are usually redeemed by receipts which come mostly from 
commodity taxes. 

If a country sells bonds abroad, it may put off this part 
of the burden by paying with future commodities for present 
commodities which the outsiders let it have. If bonds are 
floated at home only, the burden for certain individuals is post- 
poned because other individuals assume the burden for them 
temporarily, but the burden for the country as a whole is not 
put off. The things used in the war must be on hand while 
the war is being fought. Posterity cannot bear that burden. 

Under existing conditions and ideas, both bonds and taxes 
are necessary for financing our part of the war, but it is wise 
to use a large and increasing proportion of taxes because they 
can be made adequate, are all considered more just than bond 
issues, will best mobilize our military resources, and will also 
best promote industrial readjustments following the war. 
— R. G. B. 

The League to Enforce Peace. 

The League to E^in^force Peace seems on the whole the 
most promising of all the various undertakings, ancient and 
recent, to secure a real check upon frequent outbreak of 
wars. If it will not prevent wars altogether it will at least 
provide machinery which will make their wanton precipita- 
tion decidedly difficult. There is good hope that if this pres- 



THE LEAGUE TO ENFORCE PEACE 33 

ent struggle ends in a victory for the democratic and non-mili- 
taristic nations some such scheme may be accepted by the 
great powers of the world. 

Organization and Leading Articles. 

The League was organized at a conference of leading 
American publicists held at Independence Hall, Philadelphia, 
June 17, 1915. Ex-President William H. Taft was elected its 
president, and Judge Alton B. Parker its vice-president. Its 
purpose is thus expressed: 

''We believe it to be desirable for the United States 
to join a league of nations binding the signatories to the 
following : 

"1. All justiciable questions arising between the signa- 
tory powers, not settled by negotiation, shall, subject to the 
Hmitation of treaties, be submitted to a judicial tribunal for 
hearing and judgment, both upon the merits and upon any 
issue as to its jurisdiction of the question. 

"2. All other questions arising between the signatories 
and not settled by negotiation shall be submitted to a council 
of conciliation for hearing, conciHation and recommendation. 

"3. The signatory powers shall jointly forthwith use 
both their economic and military forces against any one of 
their number which goes to war, or commits acts of hostility 
against another of the signatories before any question arising 
shall be submitted as provided in the foregoing. 

"4. Conferences between the signatory powers shall be 
held from time to time to formulate and codify rules of inter- 
national law, which, unless some signatory shall signify dis- 
sent within a stated period, shall thereafter govern in the deci- 
sions of the judicial tribunal mentioned in Article 1." 

The following interpretation of Article 3 has been author- 
ized by the Executive Committee: 

"The signatory powers shall jointly use, forthwith, their 
economic forces against any one of their number that refuses 



34 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

to submit any question to an international judicial tribunal 
or council of conciliation before threatening war. They shall 
follow this up by the joint use of their military force against 
that nation if it actually proceeds to make war or invades 
another's territory without first submitting or offering to sub- 
mit, its grievance to the court or council aforesaid and await- 
ing its conclusions." 

Justiciable and Non-Justiciable Questions. 

A justiciable question is one which is capable of being 
reduced to issues of law and fact. Non-justiciable questions 
are those that arise out of the so-called national policies, like 
the Monroe Doctrine, thkt are not directly related to or recog- 
nized by international law. 

Examples: The dispute as to whether the Maine was or 
was not blown up by the connivance of the Spanish authorities 
was purely a matter of fact. Whether the murder at Serejevo 
was instigated by persons connected with the Serbian govern- 
ment involves merely an issue of fact. On the other hand, 
the claims made the the United States against England by rea- 
son of the depredations of the Confederate cruiser "Alabama" 
involved for the most part matters of law. All these questions 
are clearly justiciable. The Monroe Doctrine, maintained by 
the United States, and England's policy of maintaining a navy 
equal to those of any two other powers, are not recognized by 
law, and therefore are not justiciable. 

The British Plan. 

The British plan for such a league is practically identical 
with the American plan^ save for this important exception: 
Article 3 of the American plan commits the signatory powers 
to the joint use of economic and military pressure only for the 
purpose of compelling any national disputant, a member of 
the League, to submit its controversy in accordance with the 
provisions of Articles 1 and 2, leaving the enforcement of the 
decrees of the international tribunal to the force of the world 
opinion. The British articles, prepared principally under the 



OUR INEVITABLE INTERNATIONALISM 35 

direction of Lord Bryce, provide for the use of a joint military 
force to compel obedience to the decree of the tribunal. The 
British plan further proposes to use the military power of 
the League to compel a'ny nations that may refuse to become 
members of it, to ^bide by its principles in regard to their 
disputes with any other nations. — W. R. V. 

Our Inevitable Internationalism. 

Our country occupies a pecuHar position with reference 
to any war involving the nations of Europe. Other countries 
may hold themselves aloof with the complacent feeling that it 
is none of their affair, or they may watch developments closely 
and decide to participate where their own self-interests may 
be improved. The people at war are not their people; the blood 
that is shed is not their blood; the suffering caused not their 
suffering. As neighbors, their sympathies may be affected, 
but only as neighbors. We are not so fortunate. Of our 
100,000,000 people more than 95% are children of European 
nations. While some have been here for three hundred years, 
others have been coming in greater and 'greater numbers ever 
since that time. The ties of blood have been kept warm. Al- 
though some claim in the old world only distant relatives, yet 
others can count first cousins, brothers, and parents there. 
Everywhere about us are reminders of this close relationship. 
No language spoken in Europe is utterly foreign to us. The 
churches, the books, the customs, the traditions of all Europe 
are ours,' and all serve to strengthen the memory of our blood 
connection. 

To this strong tie of blood we have added that of trade 
and commerce. We have sent there for many comforts and 
luxuries of life which they made better than we could do. In 
return, we have given the surplus of our farms and fields and 
mines. To help us in our tremendous task of clearing the wil- 
derness, we have asked and received from them liberal loans 
of capital. We have invited them to come and establish fac- 
tories and agencies here, and they have been as liberal in 
regard to our peculiar industrial developments. As a result, 



36 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

we have been bound together by a network of commercial ties. 
There is scarcely an important center in all Europe in which 
we do not have industrial agencies, and there is none in this 
country where European trade representatives may not be 
found. Many of our industrial corporations depend almost 
entirely upon their European market, while almost all of our 
factories send a greater or less proportion of their products to 
Europe. A table of our imports and exports would show that 
our trade with the rest of the world constitutes but a small 
fraction of our trade with Europe. 

As in commerce and industry, so also in other fields of en- 
deavor we have maintained and strengthened the ties estab- 
lished by blood and trade. In learning we have sent our schol- 
ars to Europe year after year in increasing numbers, and, in 
addition, we have invited their men of learning to come to us. 
In art and music we are even more fully dependent upon them, 
and in all fields of thought and skill we have mutually aided 
each other. Our civilization, as well as our blood, is European. 

History knows no bonds between nations more powerful 
than race and trade. These and many more we have with all 
Europe. While they in Europe are separate nations, we here 
are Europe in one. Any trouble between them affects us in 
a thousand ways. Every blow struck on either side is felt 
here. Every death is mourned for here. We feel the cumu- 
lative agony of it all. While they can each extract some 
modicum of comfort from temporary victories, we feel the 
defeats as well as the victories. Our hearts have been and 
must inevitably be torn in any struggle between them. We 
cannot remain unmoved. As full-grown offspring of Euro- 
pean parents, we have an obligation and a duty which noth- 
ing can hide from us. On us is imposed the task of establish- 
ing and maintaining a just peace among them. Only thus 
can we ourselves find happiness, or the surety of a clear con- 
science. 

These, our conflicting feelings in this terrible war, have 
been felt by none more fully than by the President at Wash- 
ington. From the beginning of the war he has made per- 



•1 

is 

EUROPE AND HER SORROWS Si] 

sistent, though unavailing, efforts to bring about peace be- ' 
tween the nations. He has more than once sent personal rep- i 
resentatives to the capitals of the warring countries in the' 
hope of finding some basis for peace. Through our ambas- i 
sadors at both neutral and belligerent courts he has striven J 
to find a happier solution than war for the problem of nations, j 
He has importuned the ambassadors of the various countries ] 
at Washington to aid him in this task, and, finally, he has i 
published his desire to the world. As the representative of \ 
our conflicting feelings, he has patiently borne first one wrong ' 
and then another from both sides in the conflict. Having thus | 
exhausted the possibilities of persuasion, he has finally and re- ' 
luctantly been driven to take the last course toward a just; 
and enduring peace. With all the knowledge available, he ; 
has determined the means necessary to achieve the end we all \ 
desire — a' peace based upon the removal of the causes which ; 
have led to this war, the lasting peace, we hope, of Europe and : 
the world.— A. C. K. \ 



The Outbreak of the Great European War. j 

1914. I 

The Opportunity. In 1914 the German army was at the ; 

pink of perfection. It could hardly be increased or improved. • 

The Russian army was disorganized after the Japanese war ; 

and many strategic railroads were still unbuilt. The French ■ 

army sadly lacked heavy artillery and other equipment; be-^ 

sides France seemed rent by great political scandals. Great^ 

Britain appeared to be controlled by pacifist ministers and was ; 

threatened by civil war in Ireland. Now or never was thej 

German chance for a great increase of power. The precepts .; 

of Frederick the Great and of Bismarck forbade that such an i 

opportunity should be let slip. \ 

i 
The Plot. Serbia was a weak country with a standing j 

quarrel (over Bosnia) with Austria, Germany's supple ally. : 

Russia was the protector of Serbia, but if an attack were made ■ 

on Serbia either (1) Russia would desert Serbia and let the ; 



38 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

Teutons make a great increase of power in the Balkans at 
little risk or cost, or (2) Russia would help Serbia with arms, 
which would bring on the great war that the Teutons were 
sure they could win. Either outcome seemed desirable. 

The Pretext. On June 28, 1914, the Archduke of Austria, 
heir to the throne, Franz Joseph, was murdered at Serejevo, 
Bosnia, by assassins who seemed to have been instigated from 
Serbia. There was no proof of official sanction by Serbia for 
the deed, but here was an excellent pretext for an ultimatum. 

The Austrian Ultimatum. On July 23, 1914, at a time 
when Europe seemed remarkably quiet and when many diplo- 
mats were on vacation, Austria sent Serbia a "note" demand- 
ing, not merely the complete punishment of all her anti- 
Austrian agitators, lj)ut the allowing of Austrian officials to 
enter Serbia to take charge of the prosecution. No independ- 
ent government could have admitted such a sweeping claim. 
The Austrians must have imagined the Serbians to be rabbits 
instead of men to have proposed this and expected peace to 
continue. Serbia was given only forty-eight hours wherein to 
decide between signing away her national independence or 
war. 

Russia Becomes Involved. Russia as Serbia's "great 
brother" begged the Vienna government at least to extend 
the time limit to their demands. This was brusquely refused. 
Serbia, however, consented to nearly all the Austrian demands, 
and offered to submit the remainder to the Hague. Not the 
least attention was paid to the suggestion. Less than one 
hour after the Serbian reply was presented, the Austrian min- 
ister quit Belgrade. On July 28, 1914, Austria declared war 
on Serbia, although practically all her demands had been 
conceded. 

The Kaiser Intrudes. Russia now appealed to Germany 
to mediate between herself and Austria, making it plain she 
could not, in self-respect, allow Serbia to be overwhelmed 
without aid. Kaiser Wilhelm affected to "mediate," but 
warned the Czar this was an affair between Austria and Serbia, 
and if Russia did not abandon Serbia a great war would fol- 



EUROPE AND HER SORROWS 39 J 

low. When the Czar began to mobilize (following mobiliza- \ 
tion already by Austria) the Kaiser took the attitude that ■ 
Russia was really threatening Germany, not Austria, and be- ] 
gan counter preparations. \ 

The Kaiser Forces War. England and France (friendly j 
to Russia but anxious for peace) frantically offered moderating ] 
counsels. At Vienna the dangers of the situation at length ; 
dawned, and friendly discussions with Russia, for a compro- ; 
mise, seemed about to recommence. Then as if panic-stricken 
lest their plot be spoiled the war-lords in Berlin caused an i 
ultimatum to be sent to the Czar giving him twelve hours to j 
demobilize or Germany would strike. A similar demand was i 
sent to France (Russia's ally.) The tones of these mandates ^ 
were utterly insulting. No great nations could have cringed - 
to them. August 1, 1914, Germany declared war on Russia, i 
although the latter was still at peace with Austria, in whose j 
behalf the Kaiser claimed to be acting. j 

The Road to Paris. Prussian military plans required the ] 
first attack should be on innocent France, whose only crime \ 
was that she would not betray her Russian ally. The best j 
road to Paris lay across Belgium, and whether Germany would , 
forego martial advantage out of respect for the neutral rights i 
of a small neighboring state and for her plighted honor had | 
long been a mooted question in European military circles. The 1 
German choice between advantage and honesty was soon i 
manifested. On August 4, 1914, the Germans entered Belgium, \ 
an unoffending, happy country whose 7,000,000 peaceful peo- i 
pie had not one iota of interest in the miserable Balkan quar- ] 
rel, nor in the affairs of Austria, Germany, Russia or France. ] 

The Scrap of Paper. England had been very friendly to j 
France and Russia, but there was no formal alliance. A I 
strong peace party existed, and England might well have kept ] 
out of the war — at least for the first few months when (as :: 
events turned out) Germany, without English intervention, 1 
might have won a complete victory. But England's hono j 
was deeply concerned in defending her treaty, which guaran- | 
teed Belgium. The violation of this solemn compact silenced ? 



40 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

the British peace advocates. When the British ambassador 
went to Bethmann-Hollweg to give Germany the choice be- 
tween keeping honor as to Belgium or fighting England, the 
Chancellor cynically demanded whether England would go to 
war **just for a scrap of paper?*' 

German statesmen evidently misunderstood the way in 
which Frenchmen, Englishmen and Americans take solemn 
treaties and promises. 

England declared war on August 5, 1914. 

The Austrian note to Serbia had been presented, out of an 
almost clear sky, on July 23rd. Only twelve days had sufficed 
to change the world from Eden to Gehenna. What will seem 
the responsibility of the Teutonic arch-plotters when they 
stand at the bar of universal history? — W. S. D. 



The Pan-German Dream. 

In the past, several great nations have gotten the "world 
empire" microbe into their systems. There has been no hap- 
piness for humanity until the disease has been eradicated. 
France was possessed by it in the days of Napoleon — and the 
world was deluged for two decades with blood. Now Germany 
is the gory offender. 

The Pan-Germans. The German people are as peaceful 
as any of their neighbors, but among their oligarchic rulers 
are many powerful men (mostly among the army and navy 
officials) who, ever since William II came to power, have been 
filled with an unconcealed appetite for a great land and mari- 
time dominion and a colonial empire. The Emperor has 
shown his clear sympathy with these Pan-German schemes, 
and has used his vast authority to secure the army and navy 
needful to execute them. Admiral Von Tirpitz has been one 
of the most notable of the "world-power or downfall" jingoes, 
although their most famous literary mouthpiece has been Gen- 
eral Bernhardi. (See p. 41.) He is only one, and not the 
least violent, of their writers, however. They have exercised 



THE PAN-GERMAN DREAM 41 

a great influence over the German nation, especially the all- 
powerful "Junker" and noble castes. 

What the Pan-Germans Desire. Really they desire an 
Empire greater than that of old Rome. But that of course is 
in the background." For immediate purposes they wish to 
annex outright (or get under complete economic and political 
control) the land around Germany — Poland, Courland, Bel- 
gium, etc. Also they throw out hungry hints as to Holland 
and Switzerland ("both formerly German") and even Scandi- 
navia. Austria is very useful to them and they will gladly 
increase her influence in the Balkans — so long as she is an 
obedient ally. The same is true of Bulgaria. Turkey they 
will take under their wing, "modernize," make the Sultan the 
Kaiser's puppet — and so build a solid empire of vassal states 
clear across Europe and Asia to the Persian Gulf. The next 
logical step would be British India. 

Africa and America? — But great maritime colonies are 
wanted also. If France and England can be roundly beaten, 
they can be compelled to cede their African empires to Ger- 
many — enough at least to exploit for a time. If African 
hopes fail (by this war ending in a draw) there is still China 
and South America. Japan might oppose a conquest of China. 
The South American Republics are very weak, and their lands 
present unlimited possibilities for exploitation and the spread 
of "Kultur." The only obstacle to seizing them (once Eng- 
land and France make peace) will be the "fat, rich and un- 
military" North American republic. 

After they have established a firm grip on Central Europe, 
the Balkans, Western Asia and a large part of either Africa or 
America, the Pan-Germans will feel they are fairly on the road 
to a universal dominion, greater ultimately than was ever 
imagined by Rome. 

Bernhardi: the Arch-Prophet of Pan-Germanism. 

Who is he? A Prussian lieutenant-general — until he re- 
tired through age the commander of an army corps. Not en- 
titled to speak for all Germany, but the eloquent and significant 



42 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR i 

i 

mouthpiece for the junker-war party that have the government j 
in their grip. Friend of the Crown Prince, Von Tirpitz, et ah , 
His book, "Germany and the Next War" (pubHshed 1911) is ] 
only the most famous of many ultra-miHtarist writings which ] 
seemed so violent that before 1914 they were not taken seri- I 
ously outside of Germany. Note that German lieutenant- | 
generals are not likely to be allowed to publish things un- ^ 
welcome to the "All-Highest" and others shaping the imperial \ 
policy. A book from such a man comes straight from the \ 
fountain-head of Prussian authority. \ 

Typical sentiments of the Pan-Germanist arch-prophet: • 

"War is a biological necessity of the first importance; a ■ 
regulative element in mankind which cannot be dispensed \ 
with." (p. 18.) i 

["For the successful nation] right is respected so far only ; 
as it is compatible with advantage." (p. 19.) ] 

"Might [in many international cases] is the supreme ; 
right, and the dispute as to what is right is decided by the 1 
arbitrament of war." (p. 23.) { 

*'The United States championed the ideas of universal J 
peace in order to be able to devote their undisturbed attention ] 
to money making and the enjoyment of wealth." (p. 28.) j 

"Arbitration treaties must be peculiarly detrimental to ] 
an aspiring people [like the German], which has not yet : 
reached its political and national zenith and is bent on ex- 5 
panding its power." (p. 32.) i 

["It is outrageous that] the weak nation should have the : 
same right to live as the powerful nation. The whole idea ^ 
can only lead to the most disastrous consequences." (p. 34.) ; 

"The inevitableness, the idealism, and the blessedness of j 
war, as an indispensable and stimulating law of development i 
must be emphasized." (p. 37.) 

"Our people must learn to see that the maintenance of \ 
peace can never be the goal of a public policy [for Germany."] : 
(p. 37.) I 

["Frederick the Great of Prussia is to be commended i 
because] none of the wars which he fought had been forced 1 



BELGIAN NEUTRALITY AND ITS VIOLATION 43 

Upon him; none of them did he postpone as long as possible. 
He was always the aggressor." (p. 41.) 

"The acts of the state cannot be judged by the standard 
of individual morality. The end-all and be-all of a state is 
power, and he who is not man enough to look this truth in the 
face should not meddle in politics." (p. 45.)— W. S. D. 

Belgian Neutrality and Its Violation. 

The violation of Behgum made it practically impossible 
for all but hopelessly prejudiced people to look with favor 
upon the German cause. It became a standing refutation of 
the claim that the Teutons fought merely in defense of their 
sorely assailed **Kultur," and not for brutal aggrandizement. 
The main facts are known to every intelligent person, but 
there is utility in marking the exact stages which led up to 
what has been called "the most woeful event in history.^' 

1839. Prussia, France, England, Austria and Russia sign 
a joint treaty guaranteeing the ''perpetual neutrality" of Bel- 
gium. 

1870. Bismarck (during the Franco-Prussian war) be- 
sides giving assurances to England, gives Belgium written as- 
surances that her neutrality would be respected. 

1907. Second Hague Conference. Convention adopted 
by all the powers (including Germany) that the territory of 
neutrals was inviolable, that no armies should be sent across 
them, and that it was the duty of neutrals to resist such at- 
tempts by force of arms. 

1911. Bethmann-Hollweg directs the German minister at 
Brussels to assure Belgium "Germany has no intention of 
violating Belgium neutrality." 

1913. Von Jagow (Bethmann-Hollweg' s chief assistant) 
declares in the Reichstag that Germany would respect the 
neutrality of Belgium, and the international treaties. 

July 31, 1914. Bethmann-Hollweg evades the question 
when asked by EngHsh ambassador at Berlin whether the 



44 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

neutrality with Belgium would be respected in case of war 
with France. 

Aug. 2, 1914. German minister at Brussels reassures Bel- 
gian government "unofficially" that so far as he knew the 
neutrality of Belgium would be respected. 

Aug. 2, 1914. (Later in same day) Germany sends word 
to Brussels that in view of [non-existent] French schemes for 
violating Belgium, Germany also may have to enter the 
country. 

Aug. 3, 1914. Belgium denies any such French schemes 
exist and declares that Germany should not threaten her. 

Aug. 4, 1914. (6 A. M.) Germany formally declares war 
on Belgium for having declined its "well-intentioned pro- 
posals." German troops begin to cross the frontier. 

Aug. 4, 1914. (Later in same day) Bethmann-Hollweg in 
Reichstag boldly avows that the occupation of Belgium "Is 
contrary to the dictates of international law." [But from mili- 
tary necessity] "we must over-ride the just protests of Bel- 
gium. The wrong — I speak openly — we are committing, we 
will make good as soon as our military goal has been reached." 
"We are now in a state of necessity, and necessity knows no 
law/' 

And so Prussianism unmasked itself. — W. S. D. 

The Belgian Deportations. 

The Belgian deportations came two years after Belgium 
had first been violated by the Prussians. The invaders knew 
perfectly well what America and other then neutral nations 
would think of their actions, but in contempt for us and for 
every possible appeal of humanity they went ahead in cold 
blood. 

In the fall of 1916 the German authorities having stripped 
Belium of all raw materials, closed her factories, ruined her 
commerce, starved her people and crushed them down by con- 
stant war fines ($8,000,000 per month regularly, besides many 
extra andjgreater ones) began to deport the inhabitants, hus- 



The BELGIAN DEPORTAtlONS 45 

bands, fathers and bread winners — to Germany, there to toil 
at forced labor in G^man factories with pitiful wages and 
rations, or to starve utterly in prison camps more noxious than 
even the worst reserved for prisoners of war. 

Similar deeds can hardly be recalled since the wicked days 
of Sennacherib of Assyria and Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. 

The protests of Cardinal Mercier and of President Wilson 
were powerless to move the German military tyrants of Bel- 
gium (Von Bissing and his peers) who understood no con- 
siderations which were not military, no appeal save that of 
the sword, although vague promises of "mitigations" were 
extended. 

Early in November it was reported that the Germans 
were deporting "all men fit to bear arms, rich and poor, irre- 
spective of class, whether employed or unemployed. Hunch- 
backs, cripples and one-armed persons alone are excepted. 
These men have been torn in thousands from their families; 
15,000 from Flanders alone are sent God knows where, whole 
trainloads are going east and south." Later reports so swelled 
the numbers that it was declared the intention of the Germans 
to deport 400,000 in all before the process was ended. 

Cardinal Mercier, the heroic primate of Belgium, flung 
this protest to the horrified world: "Today all able-bodied 
men are carried off pell-mell, penned up in railway vans and 
deported to unknown destinations like slave gangs. 

"The whole truth is that each deported workman means 
another soldier for the German army. He will take the place 
of a German workman, who will be made a soldier. 

["Now] parties of soldiers enter by force peaceful homes 
tearing youth from parent, husband from wife, father from 
children. They bar with the bayonet the door through which 
wives and mothers wish to pass to say farewell to those de- 
parting. They herd their captives in groups of tens and 
twenties and push them into cars. As soon as the train is 
filled the officer in charge brusquely waves the signal for de- 
parture. Thus thousands of Belgians are being reduced to 



1 

46 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR i 

slavery." [New York Times "Current History," December/ 
1916, p. 478-481.] i 

No, this has not happened in Nineveh or Babylon or inj 
the days of Nero and heathen Rome. ^ 

It has happened just a few weeks or months ago. 1 

American soldiers (your friends perhaps) will, very likely,^ 
soon be lying dead, killed by German workmen whom these; 
Belgian slaves have released from the factories to go to thd 
trenches. J 

We are war with Germany, and unless we defeat heri 
speedily Americans (whom her militarists hate as they never: 
hated ha,rmless Belgium) will suffer worse things than theseJ 
— W. S. D. \ 

Norwegian Shipping and the German Submarine. \ 

In no country in the world does the merchant marine oc-i 
cupy so important a place in the economic life of the peoples 
as in Norway. -^ 

"At the end of 1914 the merchant fleet possessed 3,428.^ 
vessels of 100 tons or more, having a combined gross tonnage^ 
of 2,655,631. That is, there is one ton for every man, woman^ 
and child. Great Britain comes second, with less than one ton] 
for every two inhabitants." About 95% of this fleet is made^ 
up of small tramp ships, comparatively inexpensive, carrying' 
small crews, slow, and unprovided for the most part with^ 
wireless apparatus and the elaborate safety appliances of thei 
great liners. ■ 

They are, then choice game for the submarine. A fast! 
passenger boat can lead a submarine a merry chase; very fre-) 
quently she escapes; nowadays she carries naval guns and a' 
trained gun crew and if she is torpedoed she has the means of • 
summoning help and saving passengers and crew. The Nor-j 
wegian tramp is easily overhauled, and with perfect safety, fori 
she carries no guns, being an unarmed neutral; she sinks like1 
a rock and her little crew is left to chance it in open boats. ^ 
Since Germany by her submarine proclamation of February, \ 
1915, declared war on the neutral world, the losses have been \ 

\ 
\ 

i 



WHERE THE WAR HAS HIT THE HARDEST 47 

tremendous; in September, 1916, 42,614 tons; in October, 1916, 
69,482 tons. In all from the outbreak of the war to February 
28, 1917, 360 ships with a gross tonnage of 500,000. Since 
these ships, with one exception, were freighters, the loss of 
life fortunately has been comparatively small, about 300 — shot, 
frozen or overcome by, hardships'. 

Not one of the torpedoed vessels carried munitions of war; 
many of them were engaged in carrying the necessities of life 
to Norway, or from one neutral port to another. But what- 
ever the cargo, or whatever the destination, they were assas- 
sinated at sight. Against this wholesale destruction of the 
property and lives of her citizens Norway protested to the 
German government in vain, in October, 1916; in November, 
1916, and in February, 1917, the three Scandinavian govern- 
ments entered a solemn protest at Berlin against the Ger- 
man submarine decrees of January 19, 1917. The question 
may properly arise, **Why has not Norway followed the ex- 
ample of our own country and declared war?" The answer is 
obvious: First, Norway is Germany's neighbor, and she has 
no adequate means with which to defend right against might; 
she cannot take her time, as we can. Second, Norway, as she 
declared in her answer to President Wilson's appeal to neutral 
nations to break off diplomatic relations with Germany, is 
bound by the necessity of acting in conjunction with the other 
Scandinavian countries, one of which, Denmark, is even more 
at Germany's mercy than is Norway. 

The interests of Scandinavia, if Sweden, Denmark and 
Norway are not to become helpless German satrapies, demand 
the victory of America and our Allies. — M. B. R. 

Where War Has Hit the Hardest. 

If this war ends without the redemption of Poland as a 
nation and without all the Poles, not merely those in Russia, 
but in Prussia and Austria also, being united under their own 
flag and government, one of the most terrible tragedies in 



48 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

human history will have been enacted in vain. 

Belgium has seemed nearer, but Poland — the battle ground 
of three years of mighty armies — has suffered even more. 
The alleged facts are so terrible as to stagger imagination, yet 
they seem authentic. Here are the cold figures: 

In 1914 there were 34,000;000 Poles. Sincethen 14,000,000 
from one cause or another have perished. (Try to think what 
one million dead persons would seem.) 

Practically all children in Poland under 7 years of age 
have ceased to exist; disease and hunger have claimed them 
all. 

Property worth $11,000,000,000 has been destroyed. 

1,600 churches have been destroyed. 

200 cities and towns and about 20,000 villages have been 
razed to the ground. [See New York Times, Current History. 
November, 1916, p. 196.] 

And all this was smiling country full of industrious and 
harmless people three short years ago, just before the Kaiser 
and his military "experts" precipitated war on less than two 
weeks notice. 

It is for us Americans to see to it that this devil's work 
can never happen again. — W. S. D. 

Is the Case of Greece Like That of Belgium? 
Neutrality in General. 

Neutrality, with no special guarantees, is a condition car- 
rying certain rights and safeguards, but may be ended at any 
time with no breach of faith or law by belligerent acts of the 
neutral or some other state. 

Neutrality of Belgium. 

In 1830, Belgium became an independent state, breaking 
the unnatural connection with Holland established by the 
Congress of Vienna (1815), and her perpetual independence 
and neutrality were soon after guaranteed by the great pow- 
ers. They agreed not ^ to attack Belgium, nor use her as an 
ally in other contests. For any state to withdraw from this 



IS THE CASE OF GREECE LIKE THAT OF BELGIUM? 49 

compact, another congress would be necessary, and obviously 
no such change could be made with a war actually started. 

"If two men fight a duel, they fight on the agreed conven- 
tions; it is open to them before the actual struggle begins to 
ask that these conditions and conventions should be changed; 
it is not open to them without warning, when face to face with 
the adversary, to start the duel by a treacherous and false 
stroke." 

Neutrality of Greece. 

After the first Balkan war (1912), Bulgaria, Greece and 
Servia fought over the spoils won from Turkey. Allied Greece 
and Servia won, gaining some important territory, including 
Salonika, which went to Greece. Then Greece and Servia, to 
keep what they had jointly won, entered into a compact that 
if either were attacked the other should come to its assistance. 
The first occasion to enforce this was when, in the present 
war, Servia was simultaneously attacked by Austria and Bul- 
gaira. This threatened not only the acquired territory, but 
'the very existence of Servia. The help of Greece was asked, 
and Greece refused. But Servia had important friends in 
England, France and Russia. However, Servia is an inland 
state — long kept so by Austrian influence, and the only avail- 
able route by which England and France could send troops 
was by the port of Salonika and the railway leading from it. 
This was done with the tacit consent of the then prime min- 
ister of Greece, Venizelos. The civil administration of the 
past was left untouched until the intrigues of Greece with 
Germany were so dangerous that it was necessary to make 
Salonika an allied base, and finally by the blockade Greece 
has been forced to desist from active pro-Germanism. 

Conclusions. 

1. Belgium was not in the ordinary state of neutrality, 
but a neutrality secured by treaty of the great powers, includ- 
ing Germany. 

2. Germany was under no ''necessity" to violate Belgium. 
A defensive war required no such violation. What Germany 



50 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

means by "necessity" was not the protection of Germany, but 
the crushing of France. 

3. Servia was faced by "necessity." The event has 
proved it, for Servia has been wiped off the map. 

4. Greece was guilty of dastardly breach of faith by not 
coming to Servia's assistance, as by treaty clearly and unre- 
servedly bound. 

5. Greek neutrality was secured by no such compact as 
in the case of Belgium. 

6. The Allies might rightly have made war on Greece 
for her breach of treaty and her unneutral pro- German in- 
trigues. 

7. Measures taken by the Allies against Greece have in- 
volved no invasion except in Macedonia, and no destruction of 
life or property. 

8. On the contrary the character of the German invasion 
of Belgium, with the following deportations, will stamp it the 
crime of the ages. 

9. In conclusion it might be said that Greece owed her 
emancipation from Turkish slavery to the joint action of Eng- 
land, France and Russia (battle of Navarino, 1827.) No such 
service was ever rendered by Prussia or Austria. English- 
men (e. g.. Lord Byron), Frenchmen and Russians have given 
their lives that Greece might be free. — A. B. W. 

How Germany Is Governed. 

Among all great peoples Germany today gives her citizens 
the least political freedom. Even Austria and benighted 
Turkey have, on paper at least, more liberal constitutions 
than she. Germany has tried to unite modern scientific progress 
and efficiency with 17th century autocracy — a non-moral and 
unnatural union. 

The Autocratic Emperor. The Kaiser gets most of his 
power as King of Prussia, wherein his authority is absolute 
indeed, but as emperor of the 26 states of the German federa- 
tion he has practically complete control of the foreign affairs. 



HOW GERMANY IS GOVERNED 51 

army and navy of the empire. In 1914 Wilhelm II declared 
war on France and Russia by his own personal fiat, and after 
that called together his parliament and asked for a grant of 
money to wage a war about which the people had never been 
consulted. 

The Futile Reichstag. This parliament is indeed elected 
on a fairly popular basis, but it is really little more than a 
pretentious, officially recognized debating club. It cannot 
originate any important law. It has never been able to defeat 
any law which the government was really anxious to force 
through. If it resisted it was dissolved, and official influence 
got one more obedient elected. It cannot dismiss the im- 
perial ministers, who can snap their fingers at adverse votes so 
long as the Kaiser supports them. 

The Oligarchic Federal-Council. This is a more powerful 
body. But it is a secret conclave of deputies not from the 
German people but from the various German reigning princes. 
Thanks to the great power here allotted to Prussia, the Kaiser 
can almost always have his way. The Federal Council is ac- 
countable to nobody but the "majesties, highnesses and sereni- 
ties" which send out the members. It is one of the non-demo- 
cratic, and also one of the most influential bodies in the world. 

The Still Less Democratic Government of Prussia. Sixty 

per cent of all Germans live in the kingdom of Prussia. Nearly 
all local problems belong to the several German states. It is 
as King of Prussia that Wilhelm II has his greatest real au- 
thority. Prussia has the mere similacrum of free institutions. 
The phantom thereof was granted in 1850 by Friedrich Wil- 
helm IV, the great uncle of the present Kaiser, a man who 
hated constitutional rule so much that a little earlier he had 
asserted, "I will never let a sheet of paper (i. e., a constitution) 
be placed between God and our country to make its 'paragraphs 
our rulers." He granted this pretended constitution merely to 
satisfy popular clamor. 

In Prussia the King has absolute veto on all laws, and 
creates and dismisses his ministers at his own sweet will. 



S^ FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

There is a very powerful "House of Lords" of great 
princes and "life peers" chosen by the king. 

The Outrageous Prussian Electoral System. Even thus 
hampered the "lower house" of the parUament is not chosen 
by a fair ballot. Voting is open — the government and the 
junker landlord can know just how every peasant stands. The 
choice of deputies is divided on a complicated system between 
three classes of the population, graded according to the amount 
of taxes they pay. Each class has equal influence. About 3% 
belong to the first class of voters (wealthy), 9.5% to the sec- 
ond class (with moderate means), 87.5% to the third class (all 
the rest of the population). In some districts there is only 
one voter of the first class! — the great landlord, whose voice 
counts for 33 1-3% of the whole electoral body. In the Prus- 
sian election of 1903, thanks to this system, 324,000 "con- 
servative" voters chose 143 legislators, and 314,000 "Social 
Democrats" did not count for enough to choose a single one. 

Under these circumstances it is easy to see why Prussia 
is a perfect paradise for junker conservatism, and that the 
military caste (largely sprung from the Prussian landed aris- 
tocracy) is struggling against the least change in this abomin- 
able system. — W. S. D. 

Frederick the Great and the ITnited States. 

On January 31, 1917, Germany declared its policy of im- 
mediate, unrestricted submarine warfare on practically all 
merchantmen in European waters. President Wilson retorted 
to this breaking of Germany's pledges by severing diplomatic 
relations with the German Imperial Government. In a speech 
to the Reichstag on February 27th, Chancellor von Bethmann- 
HoUweg spoke with regret of this "brusque" severance of 
relations. He said : 

"For more than a century friendly relations between us 
and America have been carefully promoted. We honored 
them — as Bismarck once put it — as an heirloom from Frederick 
the Great. Both countries benefited by it, both giving and 
taking." And again, "We regret the rupture with a nation 



FREDERICK THE GREAT AND THE UNITED STATES 53 

which by her history seemed predestined surely to work with 
us, not against us." 

This is a story oft -repeated : That Frederick the Great 
was a great friend and benefactor of the thirteen colonies in 
the War of Independence. The facts are these: 

First: Frederick the" Great, like the ruling class in 
France, heartily disliked England. He prevented hired mer- 
cenaries from being sent through Prussia on their way to 
America, but only temporarily, and this seems to have been 
done out of dislike for the mercenary system. 

Second: Our envoy, Arthur Lee, was received by Fred- 
erick's minister, Baron Schulenberg, but never by Frederick 
himself. 

Third: Through Baron Schulenberg, Frederick prom- 
ised Lee that Prussia would recognize the American colonies 
when France did so. France recognized the colonies by her 
treaty of alliance in 1778. Frederick failed to keep his 
promises. 

Fourth: American warships and prizes were forbidden 
to enter the Prussian port of Emden, but were later allowed 
in the Baltic port of Dantzig. 

Fifth: Later during our war, Frederick himself became 
involved in the War of the Bavarian Succession. Then he 
needed England's friendship, and he let it be said to Lee: 
"We are so occupied with Germany that we cannot think of 
the Amicricans. We should be heartily glad to recognize 
them, but at this present moment it would do them no good, 
and to us might be very detrimental." And he wrote to his. 
brother, concerning the war of the colonies against England, 
"I propose to procrastinate in these negotiations, and go over 
to the side on which Fortune shah declare herself." 

Sixth: France actually engaged in v/ar on our side, and 
loaned us money. Even Holland had money to spare for our 
cause. Frederick admired Washington, but he gave no aid 
in the war. 



54 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

Seventh: Not until 1785, two years after the treaty of 
peace, did we finally get a treaty of commerce with Prussia, 
Then it contained very liberal provisions as to the rights of 
private property at sea in time of war, but these were due to 
Franklin's idealism and diplomacy, not to Frederick. 

These are the facts of Frederick's friendship to the 
colonies. 

W. F. Johnson, America's Foreign Relations, 2 vols., 1, 94-95. 

J. W. Foster, A Century of American Diplomacy, 92-93. 
— W. A. 

German Relations with the United States Before the War. 

What have been our relations with Germany? It is a 
statement oft-repeated that Germany has 'always been Amer- 
ica's best friend, and that all Germany has ever wished is a 
continuance of that friendship. Prince von Buelow put it in 
these words: "We can say without hesitation that during the 
last century the United States have nowhere found better 
understanding or juster recognition than in this country 
[Germany]." He could see "no single point in which the 
German and American interests are opposed." 

It would be unusual, indeed, if two nations of such size 
and of such rapid internal growth and external expansion 
should never have clashed at any point or should not have 
some opposing interests. In fact, thotigh we have never be- 
fore had war with Germany, we have had clashes with her, 
.especially from 1898 to 1902. The facts are as follows: 

Samoa. In 1888 local German and American interests in 
the Samoan islands almost precipitated a naval battle. Ger- 
man and American warships were on hand. A sudden storm 
destroyed both fleets and saved the day for peace. What 
might have happened otherwise is not known. 

Spanish-American War. Throughout the Spanish-Amer- 
ican war, German opinion was bitterly anti- American. Shortly 
after Dewey had destroyed the Spanish fleet at Manila Bay, a 
German fleet, unnecessarily large, appeared in the harbor, re- 
fused to recognize Dewey's authojity, and proceeded to vio- 



GERMAN RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES 55 r 

i 

late the blockade. What its orders were, no American knows. ■ 
Dewey was so incensed that he was prepared to fight, but the \ 
intervention of a British naval officer prevented hostilities. ' 

China — Open Door. In the same year, 1898, Germany « 
forced the Chinese to lease to her the port of Kiauchau, and j 
the partition of China into spheres of influence seemed to have I 
begun. Soon after came the Boxer troubles. The United ] 
States participated in the military expedition to Peking and j 
thus gained a position from which John Hay was able to j 
demand of the German and other governments guarantees of | 
the territorial integrity of China and of the "open door" for 1 
trade. j 

Venezuela. In 1902 Germany led the way in a blockade ' 
of the coast of Venezuela to force that country to pay certain • 
debts. Great Britain half-heartedly co-operated to protect her ; 
own interests, and Italy also took part. Roosevelt and Hay : 
soon found that Great Britain would not force the issue, but j 
Germany seemed to be insistent. It was suspected that she j 
would seize a Venezuelan port "temporarily" and then con- ; 
tinue to hold it, thus violating the Monroe Doctrine. Roose- \ 
velt at once ordered the American fleet to Caribbean waters. ; 
The German ambassador was then called in and warned that ,■ 
if the German fleet did not withdraw at once something un- j 
pleasant might happen. The ambassador delayed. A time \ 
limit was set. At the last moment the German fleet withdrew. I 



Panama — Danish West Indies. In the same year, it is now 
known, Germans were actively treating with Colombia to get 
control of the Panama Canal when the French rights expired 
in 1904. This was just at the time when we were trying to get 
the Panama route. Also in 1902 the Danish upper house de- 
feated a treaty with the United States for the sale to us of the 
Danish West Indies. For this defeat there is now good evi- 
dence that German influence was responsible. This delayed 
our acquisition of these islands for fourteen years. But at 
least the German plans of a Caribbean base were defeated 
when her Venezuelan and Colombian schemes went wrong. 



56 f^ACtS ABOUT THE WAR ,i 

Prince Henry's Visit. While these things were happen- ' 
ing, American public opinion was becoming more and more ■ 
unfriendly to Germany. The Emperor saw that something ' 
must be done to appease us and to counteract our suspicions i 
of German motives. He therefore sent to this country his j 
brother, Prince Henry, to profess openly the high regard in ] 
which Germany held us and our good esteem. ! 

From that time on, and up to the beginning of the war in ! 
1914, Germany's attitude toward the United States seemes to ! 
have become more friendly. But there was still one point on j 
which a clash might come at any time — the Monroe Doctrine. [ 

Pan- Germanism and the Monroe Doctrine. Germany ; 
needs colonies, or so her historians, her economists, and her : 
political leaders have been telling her. She must vie with ; 
Great Britian or at least with France as a colonial power. But ; 
where shall she turn? In China she is checkmated bv Russia ; 
and by Japan, and restrained partly by our "open door" policy. . 
Australia is British as are many of the smaller islands of the \ 
Pacific. Africa is mainly tropical, and the more habitable ^ 
parts are already controlled by France, Italy and Great Brit- • 
ain. There remains America, and especially South America. \ 
Here, say the Pan-Germianists, it is not too late for Germany 
to set up a colonial empire. Already there are nearly a half , 
million Germans in Brazil. The total population of South I 
America is small, relatively to Germany's, but the resources j 
and area are tremendous. ^ ^ 

Were Germany, dominated as she seems to be today b}^ ; 
the military Pan-Germanist party, to win her war in Europe,] 
then it is only reasonable to expect that the same party would J 
force her more actively into colonial projects. Her leaders j 
have already spoken their minds and their desire for colonies \ 
in South America. Germany has never recognized the Mon- ■ 
roe Doctrine. Because it has been an irksome ban, Germans ■ 
have written and spoken much about it, but not in a friendly j 
way. Perhaps we shall yet have to defend it. At any rate ! 
this may be the cause of a future clash. — W. A. , 



GERMANY AND THE HAGUE PEACE CONFERENCES 57 .■ 

1 

Germany and the Hague Peace Conferences. | 

Has Germany willed peace? Time and again during the 1. 



war German citizens, German officials, and especially the Em- 
peror himself have asserted that Germany did not will this 
war. Americans particularly have been literally implored to 
believe this true. "The sword is being forced into our hand." 
"I have not willed this war." These are the phrases we hear. 

That the German people did not will the war is unques- 
tionably true. It has for some years made small difference 
in Germany what the people willed. The Zabern incident in 
1913-14 clearly proved that. But the German military and 
official classes will find it harder to absolve themselves. The 
presumption seems to be heavily against them. The burden 
of proof is clearly theirs. Even for several decades before 
the war there were many straws in the air to show which way 
the wind was blowing. Strikingly significant was the attitude 
of the German delegates in the two Hague Peace Conferences. 

. Disarmament. The first of these conferences, in 1899, 
was proposed and called by the Czar of Russia, and quickly 
acquired the popular name of '"Disarmament Conference." In 
that term was expressed the longing of men everywhere that 
the terrible burdens of taxes and military service might be 
lifted from the weary shoulders of Europe. 

But the hope of disarmament, or even of the limitation of 
future armaments, was vain. Russia and France loyally sup- 
ported the plan, though admitting the technical difficulties in- 
volved in any plan of limitation. Colonel Gross von Schwarz- 
hoff, of the German delegation, opposed the plan as unneces- 
sary and technically impossible. He said: "I have no man- 
date to speak for my honored colleagues, but so far as Ger- 
many is concerned, I am able completely to reassure her 
friends and to relieve all well-meant anxiety. The German 
people is not crushed under the weight of charges and taxes- 
it is not hanging on the brink of an abyss; it is not approach- 
ing exhaustion and ruin. Quite the contrary; public and 



58 FACTS ABOUT THE WAR 

private wealth is increasing, the general welfare and standard 
of life is being raised from one year to another. So far as 
compulsory military service is concerned, which is so closely 
connected with those questions, the German does not regard 
this as a heavy burden, but as a sacred and patriotic duty to 
which he owes his country's existence, its prosperity and its 
future." Despite the pleas of other delegations directly to 
Schwarzhoff to alter his attitude, this opposition and many 
technical objections served to defeat the plan. If one nation 
would not disarm, none dared to do so. 

At the Second Conference disarmament was not on the 
official program. The English and American delegates united, 
however, in bringing up the question once more, and the 
French supported them. Nothing could be done. In 1907, as 
in 1899, the wish of these countries was buried in a pious 
resolution requesting the governments of the world to study 
the problem further. 

Arbitration. Supplementing the proposal that the nations 
limit their armaments was the proposition that a permanent 
court of arbitration be created for the peaceful settlement of 
international disputes. Again the opposition of Germany had 
to be met. The German Emperor was firmly opposed to any 
permanent arbitration tribunal, as in derogation of his 
sovereignty. Mr. Andrew D. White of the American dele- 
gation argued the question again and again with Count 
Munster of the German delegation, but in vain. The Emperor 
was still opposed. The committee's meetings were at a crisis. 
At the last moment Mr. White secured a postponement of the 
committee meeting. One German and one American dele- 
gate, Mr. Holls, were sent post-haste to Berlin to secure a 
change if possible in the imperial attitude. At last the Em- 
peror yielded. The permanent tribunal was established. But 
resort to the court was left optional. Germany would not go 
so far as to make it compulsory. 

Again in 1907 the imperial government opposed a general 



GERMANY AND THE HAGUE PEACE CONFERENCES 59 

treaty for compulsory arbitration, and it was this opposition 
which swung Austria-Hungary, Italy and some smaller powers 
into line and defeated the proposals. Thus in 1914 Austria- 
Hungary was not legally bound to submit the Serbian question 
to arbitration. 

The two Hague Conferences did not fail entirely. They 
accomplished much good, and upon these results future con- 
ferences can build. But the main object of the first, limitation 
of armaments, was entirely defeated, and so was compulsory 
arbitration, the chief proposal at the second. Germany really 
compassed the defeat of both. — W. A. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ^ 

021 394 5178 



